Channel
@b0tleg
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
28subscribers
+2 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1003096120099 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @b0tleg |
| Created | 29 September 2025 — measured — dated from the channel’s first post |
| First recorded | 11 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 4 times, most recently 12 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/b0tleg |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 21 Aug 2026, 16:18 | 28 | +1 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 07:37 | 27 | +1 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 08:03 | 26 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 03:52 | 26 | first reading |
17 posts held, back to 29 September 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 17 posts for this entry, the most recent from 27 July 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
1 reaction across 1 post, in 1 kind.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 1 | 100.0% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 1 of the 17 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 1 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 17 most recent posts we hold, published 29 September 2025 to 27 July 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Не зря я вёл канал про безопасность агентных платежей практически год, ведь недавно вышла отличная статья о безопасности платёжных агентов. Самые критичные риски кроются в протоколах связи между агентом и сервисом. В чем суть? Успех семантической атаки зависит от того, поддастся ли модель манипуляции. Структурная же атака срабатывает всегда (вероятность успеха - 100%), независимо от того, что под капотом: легкая и д…
❤1
Редко я нахожу что-то интересное по теме безопасности в целом агентной экономики, но Кен Хуанг выкатил Proof of Control Assurance Framework, который бьет точно в уязвимое место агентной коммерции. UCP, протокол от Google, по себе гениальный протокол согласования возможностей. Вся эта машинерия по координации миллионов транзакций между агентами и мерчантами опирается на предельно простой механизм. В её фундаменте лежа…
https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.11430
Свежий SoK по безопасности автономных LLM-агентов в agentic commerce . Мысль по сути одна. Автономный финансовый агент — это не «LLM, который умеет платить». Это четыре актора в одной сущности: языковая модель (уязвима к промпт-атакам), участник платёжной сети или блокчейна (риски расчёта и исполнения), финансовый посредник (на нём висит регуляторика) и компонент в мульти-агентной среде (открыт манипуляции со сторон…
https://x.com/evilcos/status/2051619718851866627
https://github.com/aifinlab/FinVault
Как промпт-атаки заставляют Google AP2 подписывать не то, что хотел пользователь. Защита агентных платежей в Google AP2 построена на криптографии, а ломается на уровне естественного языка. Достаточно дописать пару инструкций в описание товара, и Merchant Agent выведет его первым в выдаче, а пользователь добросовестно подпишет мандат на покупку именно того, что нужно атакующему. Исследователи описывают эту схему в ст…
Апнул список, так как с конца прошлого года появилось много годноты по этому вопросу https://github.com/wearetyomsmnv/awesome-agentic-payments
https://blog.cloudflare.com/secure-agentic-commerce/
https://github.com/visa/trusted-agent-protocol
https://www.humansecurity.com/platform/solutions/agentic-commerce/
https://www.sailpoint.com/products/agent-identity-security
Showing the 12 most recent of 17 posts we hold for @b0tleg. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 21 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Bot Ledger” (@b0tleg), 28 subscribers as measured 21 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/b0tleg.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.